If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: George Hill

I love George Hill. I think people put too much stock in "true " points. I think the most important element to a successful team is a point that can stiffle the dribble at the point of attack. Player's like Hill really take teams out of their offense. Consistantly, teams start their offense with 10 seconds or less when Hill is on the floor. Obviously you also need that same individual to take care of the basketball and set the pace. George Hill is all those things. I just hope he can stay healthy.

The Following User Says Thank You to Noodle For This Useful Post:

Re: George Hill

Why would Hill take anymore of a beating playing point guard than playing shooting guard? If anything shooting guards are generally larger and stronger than point guards, and run off screens just as much. His current injury has nothing to do with playing point. There aren't many "true point guards" that are a substantial upgrades that are also attainable. Indiana is past the point where we're looking for help in the draft for this current team. Hill's health has nothing to do with the position he's playing.
Hill doesn't turn the ball over often, and he initiates our offense. We don't run an offense that produces a ton of assists, hell Darren Collison is probably going to average substantially more assists this year, doesn't make him more of a "true point guard" than he ever was here, it's a system thing, our strength is our front court, we run lots of offense through it, a point guard is never going to average a ton of assists here.

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to daschysta For This Useful Post:

Re: George Hill

Lawson is about the only point.. well Holiday. I am a big Legend fan and believe he is instrumental in rebuilding this Franchise.

he sure missed on some pg's though. maybe Augustine can step it up but i dont see him as a long term solution at all.

regarding GH3 taking a beating playing point. i guess i mean more the on ball pressure that George must play. i guess personally i never liked the pg postiion. alot of times you do not see the screens etc etc. sg position is more off ball pressure. just the level of intensity at the position is different imo.

i believe in the pacers pregame Hill even stated its difficult for him to play purely a point gaurd position and not sg.

i think its an area the Pacers will need to address at some point before Granger's contract expires.

Re: George Hill

What I like about Hill's game is that he doesn't have to dominate the game or the ball to be effective. He fits the style of our team and his demeanor is perfect. There are better point guards, but Hill is a very well-rounded player and he can effect the game in so many different ways, I am really confident with him going forward.

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to pizza guy For This Useful Post:

Re: George Hill

George Hill is a younger Chauncy Billups. A gamer, big shot maker, great decision maker, doesn't not turn the ball over, good defender. We are too lucky to have player like him as a hometown boy as well.

Re: George Hill

George Hill is a younger Chauncy Billups. A gamer, big shot maker, great decision maker, doesn't not turn the ball over, good defender. We are too lucky to have player like him as a hometown boy as well.

Wow

Chauncey was a class player back in his day i would be absolutely thrilled if Hill became anything close to was chauncey was.

Re: George Hill

Lawson is about the only point.. well Holiday. I am a big Legend fan and believe he is instrumental in rebuilding this Franchise.

he sure missed on some pg's though. maybe Augustine can step it up but i dont see him as a long term solution at all.

regarding GH3 taking a beating playing point. i guess i mean more the on ball pressure that George must play. i guess personally i never liked the pg postiion. alot of times you do not see the screens etc etc. sg position is more off ball pressure. just the level of intensity at the position is different imo.

i believe in the pacers pregame Hill even stated its difficult for him to play purely a point gaurd position and not sg.

i think its an area the Pacers will need to address at some point before Granger's contract expires.

I don't think I understand what you are trying to say. I thought by offering the man $40M we were saying "this is our guy." He is our PG. We're not going to be actively looking for somebody to replace him. Opportunities may come up to acquire somebody else but that isn't the plan. The point guard is an important position, but anybody who isn't glamorous tends to get overlooked at the spot. I think he relishes knowing he's earned our starting point spot.

Re: George Hill

Chauncey was a class player back in his day i would be absolutely thrilled if Hill became anything close to was chauncey was.

I think Hill is going to have a huge boost in production just like Chauncey did after his first year in Detroit. It won't be 16pts a game like Chauncey, but I think his assists will get up in to the 6-7 range.

Re: George Hill

This magical true PG doesn't exist for the Pacers. Well not realistically. There are ways around it anyways. Our strength isn't in any one guy, but rather the 5 man unit. They need to play as a team. they all need to make the smart passes and take the smart shots. We aren't gonna be able to trade for Steve Nash and I don't really see a young Steve Nash out there either. Play as a team. Win as a team. Its cheesy, but it exactly what will bring this team success.

Re: George Hill

I think Hill is an average scorer, an average defender and a bad playmaker. I don't see the Billups comparison at all, Billups played like an all-star and was the best player on a championship team while Hill, like I said, is average.
Personally, I don't think Hill is the "answer" at point guard, there are about 10-15 other starting point guards i'd take over him, but we gave Hill a long contract so we might as well wait and see whether he improves

Re: George Hill

Let's not jump the gun and start all these "we need to find a true point guard threads." Hill is the right fit for this system. He is a hard nosed PG who can sees the floor well. Once he is healed up I see him getting around 12-13ppg and about 6apg. Add that to his way above average defense, ability to finish games, three point shooting, and even be the go to guy when needed, and you have the right PG for this team. Just because he came here from San Antonio as a combo guard doesn't mean he can't start at PG.

Re: George Hill

This magical true PG doesn't exist for the Pacers. Well not realistically. There are ways around it anyways. Our strength isn't in any one guy, but rather the 5 man unit. They need to play as a team. they all need to make the smart passes and take the smart shots. We aren't gonna be able to trade for Steve Nash and I don't really see a young Steve Nash out there either. Play as a team. Win as a team. Its cheesy, but it exactly what will bring this team success.

Im in complete agreement with you that the Pacers win due to their maturity and their ability to play as a team. There are very, very few "great" point guards out there in the NBA. George is not a great PG but he is a solid all around pro who will help us more than hurt us. He also is a hard worker with leadership skills that the Pacers can use with Granger down.

Re: George Hill

I think Hill is an average scorer, an average defender and a bad playmaker. I don't see the Billups comparison at all, Billups played like an all-star and was the best player on a championship team while Hill, like I said, is average.
Personally, I don't think Hill is the "answer" at point guard, there are about 10-15 other starting point guards i'd take over him, but we gave Hill a long contract so we might as well wait and see whether he improves

Before Billups played with DET, he was an average player on losing teams. In fact, he was thought to be a bust as the number 3 pick in the draft. He eventually found a team that allowed him to play to his strengths. He didnt start playing like an all star until a little later in his career.

George Hill has been an important player on playoff teams in each of his first 4 seasons. We've played our best basketball with him as our starter at the PG position. He's now on a team that fits his strengths. Though I don't fully see the comparison in their games, I don't think he's as bad as some make it seem. Alongside West, he's definitely one of the closers on this team.

Re: George Hill

This magical true PG doesn't exist for the Pacers. Well not realistically. There are ways around it anyways. Our strength isn't in any one guy, but rather the 5 man unit. They need to play as a team. they all need to make the smart passes and take the smart shots. We aren't gonna be able to trade for Steve Nash and I don't really see a young Steve Nash out there either. Play as a team. Win as a team. Its cheesy, but it exactly what will bring this team success.

Steve Nash is so bad defensively, his team will never win a championship. Defense starts at the point.

Re: George Hill

Pacers are going to need a pure pg to get max out of Roy Hibbert. we have seen this same issue before in getting the ball into the post. if its not resolved soon then trade for a pg or we will be looking for a new coach.

really like Vogel but he has to get more out of this team.

* Paul George is recieving some criticism in other threads already about him reaching his ceiling. Would Paul George be best served in moving to SF. Slide George Hill the the off gaurd and find a point gaurd thats legit. If Pacers do not have a solid record by the all star break we may be considering Granger or George trades.

not wanting to jump the gun but the ball movement has to improve. hopefully Granger returns soon so we know what we have here at full strength.

Re: George Hill

GHill is clearly some kind of tweener. Nevertheless, he is worth the money. Why? Because he is a big game player.

It doesn't matter if it's the 1 or the 2. He will be in at the end of games. Because he has to be. His ability to perform when it counts will make him worth it. We need to surround him with a creative, playmaking two guard (Lance?) or a point guard that can compliment him. But I really don't think we will regret giving a solid contract to a big game player. My two cents.

.

.

.

.

"I like our group of people," Ainge told USA Today. "I'm trying to teach them about basketball, and they're trying to teach me about analytics."